The Karnataka High Court on Friday directed the Special Court, trying the disproportionate assets case against AIADMK general secretary and former Tamil Nadu Chief Minister Jayalalithaa, to refer all the defects in the English translation to an interpreter besides setting a deadline of 15 days for the accused to point out defects in the translated documents.
Justice K.N. Keshavanarayana passed the order while disposing of a petition filed by Ms. Jayalalithaa questioning the order of the Special Court, which had referred only some defects to the interpreter.
However, the High Court found that the “Special Court was not justified in not referring the defects to the interpreter to give opinion on the other applications filed by the accused as was done in earlier applications. This has certainly resulted in prejudice to the accused.”
The High Court also directed the Special Court to consider both the suggested version of the accused and interpreter's versions while formulating the questions for recording the statement of the accused under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.PC), and rendering judgment on merit.
The High Court said that recording of statement under Section 313 of Cr.PC was an opportunity to the accused to explain the incriminating circumstances appearing against them in the evidences.
“Therefore, statement under Section 313 is not an empty formality. Special Court is required to apply its mind to the evidences on record while formulating circumstances in the evidence. If there are errors/defects/mistakes in translation, the court will not be in a position to frame proper questions. It is important even while framing questions for Section 313 Cr.PC and also at the time of rendering judgment,” the judge observed.
The High Court observed that “may be the suggested version, as opined by interpreter, convey the same meaning but for choice of words. However, to provide fair trial to the accused, this exercise should have been undertaken. No doubt this exercise would consume some time, but that cannot be a factor to deny fair opportunity to the accused.”
The court also considered the fact that the Special Court judge cannot understand Tamil and has to rely on documents translated to English from Tamil.
Referring to argument of the prosecution that the accused had ample time to point out mistakes/errors/defects when the trial was stayed by the Supreme Court for nearly five years since 2005, the High Court said that it cannot be the reason to deny an opportunity to looking into the defects but a timeframe will have to be fixed to carry out this exercise.
While giving 15 days to the accused to point out errors/mistakes/defects, the High Court directed the Special Court to refer them to the interpreter and seek a report from him within 10 days thereafter. With this order of the High Court, the Special Court will not be able to proceed with recording of the statement of the accused from March 26 as scheduled earlier.
